Gnostic Sabotage in Progress

"And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb."

As 2017 kicks off, I am intent on certain writing projects including a printed version of Gnostic Sabotage in the Book of Revelation : How Christianity Holds the Seeds of its Own Destruction. The text would be drawn from edited transcriptions of existing talks posted in 2012 in anticipation of the alleged endtime of the Mayan Calendar, December 21, 2012. Those talks are somewhat prolix and rambling, not entirely up to my standards, and I chose to withdraw three of them.

Recently, however, I had occasion to relisten to the 7th talk which I have reloaded and listed in the landing page for Gnostic Sabotage: 7, Special Effects in the Pagan Apocalypse.

I can still stand (just barely) on my comments about darkness, specifically: "Demons cannot hide in darkness." The language is unclear when I say that psychopaths (who are AS IF demonically possessed) act in secrecy, yet the demons operate out in the open, in the full light of day. The paradox is not entirely clear.

To reiterate: Something done "in darkness" may be considered as concealed, hidden, secret. Commandos attack a target under cover of darkness. The element of darkness allows them to act undetected. In itself that element is neutral. Secrecy is the problem, not darkness as such. It is plain stupid to consider darkness as evil; that manner of speaking when taken literally is erroneous. To reify darkness -- making it into a thin or a substantial force -- is a serious syntax glitch. It is merely a metaphor for the condition of secrecy.

So how can doing things in secrecy and showing them out in the open, coincide? Well, events planned in secrecy, arranged by connivance and with intent to deceive, eventually come to be enacted out in the open. For instance, the jewish bankers running the Fed connive in secrecy on an agenda unknown to the world at large, and then enact it in the open. An action, or plan of action, supported by a secret agenda acquires it unusual force, so there is plenty of advantage to be gained from working in secrecy. But the works of secrecy unfold in the open.

I also stand by my comments (m 40) on the vision of Daniel and how Old Testament prophetic visions do not explain To Mega Therion and the handler, the lesser beast. If you really want to explore the background of this material, there is one essential book by John J. Collins.

For a summary, see also is essay: http://www.marquette.edu/maqom/martinezdss.pdf

The author of that paper, Florentino Garcia Martinez, is the Dead Sea Scroll scholar who assisted me in examining the microfiche collection at the Catholic University of Leuven in Belgium, to determine one letter in the War Scroll that might be read either as a B or an S, due to a water spot blurring the script. (Note 251, Not in His Image)

Victim-Perpetrator Syndrome

My call to stand against the narrative of the pretender god and come down hard on those who place their faith in that entity and his messiah, looks as relevant today as it did four years ago. More so, I would say. Christianity needs to go down like the Titanic if humanity is to find the path ahead. Christians need to be frontally challenged. Suffer these fools gladly, and you merely perptuate their delusions. My stance here may seem excessively harsh, but basic sanity is at stake. There is no item of Christian faith, nor any single ethical precept of "Christian values," that can stand against five minutes of scrutiny. It has come to that point.

Regarding the Lamb of God (m 50 on), I underscore again that this figure is extremely toxic and needs to be utterly purged from human imagination. The archetype of the scapegoat ("innocent lamb who bears the sins of the world") has to be cast out of the human mind, as the scapegoat (Azazel) was traditionally cast out into the wilderness in Judaic ritual. The archetypal image of the scapegoat needs to be expelled from human imagination. It is the psychological pivot of the victim-perpetrator syndrome, operating like an "NLP anchor" (look it up).

I don't know of any writer who has systematically, vividly, and ruthlessly deconstructed the victim-perpetrator syndrome as I have done in Not in His Image, page after page, passage after passage. But each and every person has to remove that anchor by an act of heresy, choice, and finally cast the Lamb of God into oblivion. It is a foreign installation planted in the human mind by Jewish treachery inspired by archontic demons. Like the crucifix, the image of the god-man tortured on the cross, the Lamb of God is a superstitious fetish designed to undermine human dignity. A jewish voodoo doll. (No slight meant to Haitian voudoun, which is a legitimate system in its own right, but sadly ineffective. Mimetic magic does not work against archontic demons.)

Pagan Apocalypse

It takes me a while to get to the subject of the title .... The five concluding points on "special effects" to be manifested in the Pagan Apocalypse are:

1. Recovery of innocence, sexual awakening, purity of the body and the life-force, pleasure, delight, play (ludic capacity). "To stand in rapture before the planetary animal mother means to be seized by the power of To Mega Therion."

2, Natural magic, skills of the lesser beast, signs and wonders, drawn from infernal-telluric power of the earth, wonderment, communion with nature, return to Pagan ways of life, love for the animal world

3. Blasphemies, taboo-breaking insights and actions, the aroma of the Great Beast is blasphemy. Revelation 17: 3:

" I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns."

Massive offence to believers. Gnostic instruction cannot be blasphemed.

4. Powers of the lesser beast, the handler: to kill, to enchant the world, to construct an icon of the Great Beast, interactive magic.

5, The seven seals, contrasted to the 18 power-nodes of To Mega Therion: 6 + 6 + 6 = 18. Look again at the famous verse in Revelation 13:18-- my edit!!!:

Here is wisdom (SOPHIA). Let him that hath understanding count (i.e., COMPUTE) the number of the beast: for it is the number of man (ANTHROPOS); and this number is six plus six plus six.

The essential trick regarding the most famous verse in Revelation is: to understand WISDOM, you have to compute the number of the Beast. PSEPHISATO TON ARITHMON: literally, "do the math." Compilation of a date, "six hundred threescore and six," is not counting or computing. The number is not a date, it is the computation of the powers of wisdom inherent to the Great Beast. How do you compute 666? By adding it up: 18. Or by multiplication: 216. Those are the two, and only two, ways to count the number of the Beast correctly.

Gnostic advisors leaked this intel to the mad monk in the cave, but the monk did not follow their instructions and compute the number correctly -- nor have 70 generations in 2000 years since that time done so. The number of the To Mega Therion is 18. That is the correct computation. And there is more, because a date is implied. The routine manner of computing a date, "four score and seven years ago", etc, may have been applied to 666 by English translators who picked up a subliminal cue without knowing it. The number of the date associated with the Beast is hinted in the second computation: 6 X 6 X 6 = 216. What kind of date is that? Add 2000 to come into our era and you have 2216, the end date of Kali Yuga, and the moment of the turnover of the Kalpa.

Childish Superpowers

The seven seals I would now interpret in two ways. First, the dynamic composite of the Great Beast can be regarded as having 18 seals, 18 nodes of power. You see this composition in the Shakti Cluster, obviously. Well, no big surprise, the central icon of Planetary Tantra is a graphic mandala, the "image of the beast" (ikona to therio) described in Revelation, Ch. 13. PT is exactly what the telestai who advised John of Patmos were warning him about, or perhaps better said, they planted the seed of PT in his feverish mind as a proleptic cue. Cards on the table, there is nothing to be coy about. It can be said that Planetary Tantra in all its details, including the role of the handler, is "predicted" in the Book of Revelation. Look at this passage.

[14] And [the lesser beast, the handler] deceiveth them that dwell on the earth by the means of those miracles which he had power to do in the sight of the beast; saying to them that dwell on the earth, that they should make an image to the beast, which had the wound by a sword, and did live.

[15] And he had power to give life unto the image of the beast, that the image of the beast should both speak, and cause that as many as would not worship the image of the beast should be killed.

Additional to the 18 seals of the Shakti Cluster, I would now add another interpretation: the countermagic to the seven seals of Revelation can be found by releasing what is contained in the calibration of the Anthropic genome: the saptaparna or seven-leafed plant of the Vedic seers. The seven faculties of the original design of humanity, when released from repression and deceit, can develop to a genius level with the result of full mutation into Anthropos-11. Fantasies of X-Men and freak children with occult powers such as telepathy, telekinesis, and shape-shifting, etc, command great fascination to people today. Especially young people.

In the Great Deception talks, I argue that the defeat of Satan anticipated by Christians -- which I interpret as liberation from the illusion of GOOD VS EVIL -- comes in one and the same event as the demise of Christianity. The total collapse of Christian faith and Christian values (so called) would be one of the best things that could happen in this world, right now. The benefits of that collapse would be immense, not the least of which being, the return to courage and heroic valor by total rejection of the jew-rigged ethic, "resist not evil, turn the other cheek, do good to those who harm you."

It is difficult to tell what is more unfortunate: Jesus was really sincere in proposing this kind of behavior, or he was being intentionally perverse. In either case, the ethic of cheek turning is utterly wrong because it obliges people who are not inclined to harm others to rely on those who do harm to embrace the same practice of non-defence.

But will people who are inclined to harm and abuse others change their behavior voluntarily, just because they are confronted with someone who does not resist them? In what instances in human experience has this occurred? Perpetrators are obliged to be defensive, but in quite another way. They hide and lie and do whatever it takes to protect themselves so that they can perpetrate without being detected or defeated. Is it reasonable to expect that people who act in this way will voluntarily adopt the ethic of cheek turning? To propose a code of morality that relies on the good will of perpetrators to desist from their ways is a real stroke of schizoid genius.

One may begin to wonder if such a code does not originate with the perpetrators in the first place.

Innocence Reloaded

m 55:50 "The very nature of innocence is that it does no harm."

I must qualify this assertion, and rather strongly. Innocence in the human animal is not merely a passive quality -- for example, the "innocent bystander" killed in a terrorist attack at an airport. Sure, but there is more to the issue here. Four years on, it's time to reconsider my assertion of December 2012.

Innocence does not harbor the intention to harm, true, but it does hold the capacity to harm. Children can and often do innocently harm themselves or others, due to lack of knowing better. For instance, one child blinds another with a firecracker, innocently, not intending any harm but ignorant of the risk. That is clear and evident. But if an innocent child can harm without intention, what is to be said about the child who harms with intention? Is that a wicked child? Think about Carrie.

Of course, we are not considering the innocence of children here, but the innocence of adults, the innocence of the human being pictured perversely in the Lamb of God. I will venture a phrase: the innocence of the human animal. It is lamb-like, but can the human animal also be wolf-like at the same time? "And the wolf shall dwell with the lamb." (ZAB in the original Hebrew of the Old Testament means wolf, definitely not lion: zab om kbsh, "wolf with lamb". What happened to the lion? More on that question soon....)

Without going into an elaborate commentary, I will propose here that adult human innocence carries a challenge. See if you can detect in your innocence, such as you feel it, a challenge, a call of sorts. Consider that plumbing your innocence reveals a sense of responsibility, it concretizes in your conscience. Responsibility for what? To do what?

The wolf is the totem animal of the Kalika War Party composed of bands that may be compared to wolf packs. Kalikas run in packs. One of the guiding memes of the KWP is The Parable of the Wolves.

"Romance is a den of wolves, and we're in it." The nagual with Kalikas in telestic session at Witchaven, November 2, 2016

The wolf dwelling with the lamb does not merely represent the responsibility to protect innocence: for example, the predatory wolf who excels in violence acting as guardian of the lamb. No, the meaning goes much deeper. The wolf dwelling with the lamb reveals that the wolf-nature, to hunt and kill, co-exists with the lamb, i.e., with innocence. The killing power of the wolf is present within the innocence of the lamb, the human animal. Or it has to be, for the lamb to survive.

Consider this conversion of syntax (rendering, in Tantric jargon) :

Christian faith insists that the creator god had his son killed to save humanity, but in Gaian ethics, the human animal in all innocence has to kill its own kind to save itself.

That is the calling of the hero, the Kalika, be it man or woman. If you do not respond to the call of the Kalika due to lacking the disposition to violence, then you might at the very least lend recognition and respect to those who do have it, and act on it. For they are making the world safe for those who lack the courage and strength to oppose intra-species predation.

Note: In future exposition on Gaian ethics, violence, and the moral purpose of hate, coming from the Maitreya, you can expect to see a sharp distinction between the perils of intra-species predation and parasitism, due to the archontic infection. A parasite such as a tapeworm is not the same as a predator in nature, such as a leopard. This distinction needs to be absolutely clear. Regarding the parasite, certain strategies apply and stand distinct from the contra-violence of Gaian ethics. Would you consider exterminating vermin to be an act of violence? In any case, there are two different, clear-cut challenges here, and the difference needs to be elaborated.

Note also: Trigger warning in proximity of transgressive material. If the wolf shall dwell with the lamb, and not eat the lamb, that does not mean the wolf does not eat any animals, any more, at all. I know a lot of vegetarians, quite closely, which poses no problem for me as a dietary regime of choice, but I can assure you that the vegetarian fantasy of predatory animals ceasing to kill and eat their prey is not on the menu -- if you will allow that allusion. The prey-predator bond is one of the top five guiding lessons of Gaian ethics. Ignore that lesson at your peril.

Moral Imperative

In retrospect I can see that I did not realize at that time (December 2012) how innocence is wrongly conceived as a passive condition. If you are innocent, something may befall you that you do not bring upon yourself. You may be harmed without having done anything to call harm upon yourself. In pedositism, innocent children are harmed, abused, molested, terrorized, and killed. The innocent condition of the children is lamb-like, passive.

Which is true as far as it goes. I see now that there is an active force in innocence -- or perhaps better said, there needs to be. There is a force inherent to innocence that has to be activated, if innocence is to survive. If protection cannot come from outside, from another agency, there must be explicit agency to harm within innocence. Meaning, you can harm or kill someone in total innocence. Doing so, you would be responsible for the act and its result, but you would not be guilty. You would feel no guilt and be untouched by accusations of guilt. Guilt is generally regarded as the opposite of innocence in legal terms, but also in moral terms. The jury rules the suspect in a murder case to be guilty or not guilty, i.e., innocent. Innocent in this context means: did not do it.

But you can do it, harm or kill, and still be innocent. In that case, you would be responsible for the harm or death caused, but not guilty. To find the responsibility of innocence entails something like the acquisition of a new sense for the human animal: a sense of wolf-like alertness, readiness to harm. The capacity to hunt and kill is the excellence of the wolf and other sublime predators like the great felines who roam through the dreaming of the Wisdom Goddess. They kill and eat animal flesh. They are not there by chance. They are there to provide instruction and moral direction for the human animal who shares the habitat with them.

The anomaly of the human animal who in all innocence can hunt and kill is this: the predation is not performed for food but purely for a moral purpose. To kill to acquire food to eat is a natural act, ordained by the Earth Mother. To kill to eliminate human evil is a moral act. To harm and kill for the purpose of opposing and defeating evil in the human world is the unique prerogative of the human animal, no other species does so. And no other species faces the challenge to act on that prerogative by choice, rather than by inborn instinct. That unique choice expressing the moral purpose of violence resides in human innocence.

jll: Flanders 9 January 2017